The 37-year-old, who has had the hair loss condition since she was a child, said she was left shocked when a cleaner at the Trinity Square shop asked her “Are you aware you’re in the female toilet?” She said she became distressed and burst into tears.

  • restless [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Helen said she feels the incident in Tesco may have stemmed from the debate in recent years over transgender rights. She said: "I suspect it’s stemming from this which is a shame but I think potentially why people are being more cautious.

    "I can understand the cautiousness from a business point of view but they’ve also got to be aware of diversity and people being different. They should not make assumptions on visible differences.

    “I just think that we need to raise awareness of the condition and that people do look different. If you’re concerned about something ask privately or sensitively.”

    So she’s not against the public harassment of people using toilets per se, just doesn’t want them directed against people with her condition specifically? Girl, visible differences are almost entirely what this boils down to in practice—people being uncomfortable when they see someone who doesn’t look “normal”. Justifying the underlying motive but not the outcome just means you want a carve-out

  • mjr@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Once idiots feel empowered to become the Pants-contents Police, this is where it leads.

    Why has a company as rich as Tesco still got mostly gendered toilets anyway?

  • kablez@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Just get rid of gendered toilets already. If you can’t play nicely with it, you shouldn’t have it.

    • Obviouslywrong@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 hours ago

      You need urinals in some fashion, a row of standing urinals can be pretty private if you just have a tall divider, but their throughput is so much higher it would be terrible if you lost them in high traffic areas.

      • stoly@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 hours ago

        lol you assume that the doors have to be open. you can have floor to ceiling doors like places with gender neutral bathrooms do

    • ZapBeebz_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 hours ago

      The SEATAC airport has a few non-gendered restrooms and they’re pretty nice. There’s a big shared area with sinks, a wall of “stalls” (really fully enclosed toilet rooms, no panel gaps and floor to ceiling doors), and a separate room off in the back with urinals (and an automatic sliding door). Kinda seems like a pretty good solution all around.

  • RedSnt ♾️🦋♂️👓🖥️🐧@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 hours ago

    When we were paying for parking he chased after us and gave me a bunch of flowers.

    That Tesco manager chasing after Helen and her husband with flowers was a class act though.

    Helen said she feels the incident in Tesco may have stemmed from the debate in recent years over transgender rights. She said: "I suspect it’s stemming from this which is a shame but I think potentially why people are being more cautious.

    "I can understand the cautiousness from a business point of view but they’ve also got to be aware of diversity and people being different. They should not make assumptions on visible differences.

    “I just think that we need to raise awareness of the condition and that people do look different. If you’re concerned about something ask privately or sensitively.”

    What is this “cautiosness” she’s talking about? There has literally never been a case of a transgender person doing anything inappropriate in a public toilet…

  • Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Helen, who appeared as an actress in zombie movie 28 years later, said she decided she did not want to hide her hair loss by wearing wigs.

    I just saw that film and didn’t remember which role she had, so I checked IMDB, and it just says “infected women”.

    Turns out they gave her really shitty patchy strands of hair as part of that role: https://www.facebook.com/groups/379052361293089/posts/725981959933459/ That was accidentally kind of funny and unexpected.

  • als@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Transphobia harms everyone, not just trans people. It’s sad that this argument needs to be used, but I’ve heard some cis people find it convincing.

    • paks@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Sadly even this doesn’t help with some people.

      I once had a conversation with a particularly tall cis woman who’d briefly been the target of transphobic abuse in a womens’ toilet. She somehow managed to blame this on the existence of trans people 🤷

    • Eq0@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Two cynical takes on “transphobia harms everyone”:

      • I only care if it affects me
      • trans are only a small percentage of the population, who cares, but if it harms everyone then it makes sense to care

      (Not apologizing for transphobia, just deconstructing the thought)

      • yermaw@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 hours ago

        i only care if it affects me

        Thats pretty much my stance, but you must always be thinking “if it can happen to them it can happen to me”

      • Necronomicommunist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Sure, ideally the way it impacts trans people should be enough. But anything that affects more people negatively is a worse thing.

        If I wanted to influence car safety policy, and I can pick from two examples to make my case:

        1. a car accident kills the person driving it
        2. a car accident kills everyone inside it and some bystanders

        I’d be a fool not to use 2 as an example.

      • scratchee@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 hours ago

        I often think about this. I don’t think it’s wrong to provide selfish reasons to do the right thing.

        In the end, the world is full of people with different priorities and ways of thinking, if you restrict yourself to only the “pure” morality arguments it’s not like you can use the purity of your argument to correct the brains of all the people who are not swayed. But if you provide a variety of arguments you’ll convince lots more people.

        And in reality most people are not pure selfish or pure selfless. Spoonful of sugar (selfish benefit) helps the medicine (selfless morals) go down.

        Not trying to entirely quench your cynicism, just lightly cool it.